Southwest Airlines: Baker Workgroup

Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup Reducing disruption and delay to accelerate performance

A CASE STUDY IN THE BUSINESS PRACTICE REDESIGN SERIES FROM THE DELOITTE CENTER FOR THE EDGE

OUTHWEST Airlines (SWA), based in Dallas, traffic, or close an airport) when the unexpected operates more than 4,100 flights daily to more happens, dramatically increasing on-time perfor- than 100 destinations. As the nation’s largest mance and transporting more customers to where S 1 carrier in terms of originating domestic passengers they need to be, when they need to be there. boarded, SWA operates a point-to-point network Seemingly essential to Southwest’s overall suc- with a fleet consisting entirely of 737s. SWA prides cess is its nerve center, the Network Operations itself on quick turns at the gate from time of arrival Control (NOC). NOC is home to two workgroups to time of departure, and it constantly seeks to im- whose methods and behind-the-scenes innova- prove how it makes decisions that affect the network tions many credit for greatly improving the expe- (for example, to delay or cancel flights, slow down rience of those who fly Southwest—and for giving

1 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

a sustained boost to the airline’s performance. The terdependent—in particular the analysis and Baker workgroup is one. The other is the Field Tech interpretation of trade-offs and impact that feed workgroup, a specialized unit of aircraft mechanics back into the tool. who fix what no one else can. Supervisors of dispatch “manage the business operations of the airline” through network deci- The workgroup: Baker sions. SoDs are the people who balance overall flight flow—canceling flights, shutting down air- The Baker workgroup is made up of dispatch ports, swapping aircraft. In determining how best superintendents and software developers focused to get customers home on time, they take into ac- on improving decision-making around unantici- count everything from customer and crew needs to pated operational and weather-related events. This weather to runway arrangement and maintenance. workgroup meets our key criteria for a frontline They touch all parts of operations and work closely workgroup: with the dispatchers, who are the people on the • Size: Baker is composed of four supervisors of ground responsible, with the pilots, for the safety dispatch (SoDs), three main software engineers, of the flight. and two software engineers in support. When Southwest was a small regional airline • Sustained involvement: The software engi- with a handful of planes and routes, operations neer members of Baker are fully dedicated re- were comparatively simple. But with rapid growth, sources. The workgroup’s four SoDs carry out the established process of dispatching and modify- their regular duties while spending a majority ing flight plans, and cascading through the other of their time with Baker, developing a tool to parts of operations (for example, crew scheduling), support decision-making as well as devising and became complex and time-consuming—developing testing new approaches for handling unantici- just one solution for a particular flight path could pated disruptions to the Southwest network. take hours. As one SoD described the network: Not • Integrated effort: The ongoing design, de- only were there more planes—there was a lot more velopment, and enhancements to the decision- momentum, and no one was able to stop on a dime making tool require the group’s integrated and and redirect, a response that had worked well when collective effort. Much of members’ work - isin the airline was small.

Figure 1. Inside NOC

Left: Inside Southwest’s Network Operations Control (NOC)—a secure facility located outside Dallas, which manages the airline’s operations 24/7 across the world. Right: Screens in NOC. Source: Southwest Airlines l, Russ Basset Consoles r. Deloitte Insights deloitte.cominsights

2 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

A group of SoDs charged with increasing South- The results: On-time west’s on-time performance (OTP) took it upon performance leap and themselves to build a tool to make their jobs easier better outcomes and more effective and to devise new ways to make complex network and routing choices. They named Thanks perhaps to the workgroup’s efforts to themselves Baker in honor of a late colleague, Mike rethink how Southwest handles unanticipated dis- Baker, who was passionately committed to improv- ruptions, the Baker group seems to have helped the ing the airline’s routing system. airline boost on-time performance (OTP) during When the workgroup first formed, its primary extreme winter storms by more than 200 percent, focus was on developing a tool that could acceler- while canceling fewer flights. ate SoDs’ ability to address major disruptions more This data highlights the airline’s performance effectively for both passengers and crew. After creat- in severe weather disruptions—defined as major ing a preliminary version, Baker members split their storms affecting three or more major cities for an ex- time between further developing and refining the tended duration. To measure its efficacy, Southwest tool, managing the actual network operations using looked at performance across three winters over the the tool, and using the results as a basis for reflecting course of the Baker group’s activities. Winter storm on and refining their collective approach to making Hercules occurred in 2014, prior to the Baker work- trade-offs in large, network events. The humans in group shifting to emphasize more proactive deci- the network still must weigh the trade-offs and make sions; Thor hit in 2015, after the SoDs had adopted the decisions, but the tool can give them visibility a proactive stance and had implemented several of into the implications of their decisions. By being in- the workgroup’s changes, such as not defaulting to timately involved in the development and use of the operate all possible flights; and Olympia, in 2016, tool as well as in real-life, real-time decision-making, followed further refinement of the Baker group’s the workgroup members have a firsthand perspec- solutions and implementation of the Baker tool.2 tive on where the program successfully accelerated Since its formation in 2015, the workgroup has performance—and where it needed improvement. not only improved the airline’s performance during adverse weather conditions—it has helped improve

Figure 2. Southwest winter storm performance, 201416

Hercules 29 Winter 2014 11

61 Thor Winter 2015 6

Olympia 74 Winter 2016 4

On-time performance Cancellations

Source: Southwest Airlines. Deloitte Insights deloitte.cominsights

3 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

OTP for all Southwest flights by 2.11 percent. This is friction, Prioritize performance, and Frame a pow- a significant jump given that airlines normally mea- erful question. sure improvement in OTP in tenths of a percentage point. And while many airlines have gamed their

OTP numbers by canceling flights, Southwest -can SEEK NEW CONTEXTS celed 900 fewer flights than it had prior to Baker FRAME A MORE CULTIVATE 3 POWERFUL FRICTION over a similar period of time. UESTION VO In addition, the total number of customers de- PRO KE

layed by two or more hours decreased by 95 percent MAXIMIZE P PRIORITIZE over two years once the workgroup’s solutions were POTENTIAL U PERFORMANCE

FOR FRICTION L TRAJECTORY 4 L fully implemented in 2016. And when a flight did T L O E have to be canceled, the workgroup’s efforts allowed G P E O T R H P BIAS Southwest to give passengers more advanced warn- ELIMINATE ER TOWARD UNPRODUCTIVE ACTION ing. Prior to the workgroup’s formation, SWA pas- FRICTION sengers regularly received cancellation alerts two REFLECT COMMIT TO hours or less before departure time. By the end of MORE TO LEARN A SHARED FASTER OUTCOME 2016, passengers were receiving such notifications up to 10 hours in advance,5 averting many situations in which passengers arrive at the airport only to learn their flights have been canceled. The more COMMIT TO A SHARED OUTCOME lead time Southwest could offer passengers, the greater the likelihood the airline could seat them on new flights. As a result, the itinerary completion— The Baker workgroup formed around the shared the rate at which passengers that reach their intend- desire to create a tool that would ed destination—has improved dramatically as well. help the SoDs improve on-time OTP, cancellation rate, and passenger itinerary performance while also making completion are the three measures of success that their jobs easier. matter most to these frontline workers. They be- Dealing with disruptions such lieve that an impact there could generate both great- as snow and strong winds had re- er customer satisfaction and lower operational costs quired highly manual work and hours of across the airline, directly affecting both revenue coordination. Not only had it been difficult to see and margins. In addition, the proactive, faster, and the impact of a certain set of decisions until things more-informed decision-making enabled by the were already in motion—separating skill from luck Baker workgroup’s solutions have reduced turnover. after the fact was challenging. As the group gained As one SoD said, “With three hurricanes in a month, momentum on the tool, the shared outcome shifted: in the past that would have been all hands on deck, It was less about the tool itself and more about an 24/7, for weeks to repair the system and get passen- ongoing commitment to improving itinerary com- gers home. With the tool and our approach, it’s a pletion, canceling fewer flights, and having more whole different job.” flights arrive on time. This commitment aligns with Southwest’s long-standing commitment to being Practices in play passenger-friendly. The workgroup believed that if it could have a significant impact in those two areas, The Baker workgroup uses five intersecting it would improve the experience for both passen- practices: Commit to a shared outcome, Reflect gers and crew. Having the dispatchers spearhead more to learn faster, Maximize the potential for the creation of the software tool they themselves

4 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

would use ensured that the outcome sought by de- including those of dispatchers and crew schedulers, velopers and users was shared, too. to capture the collective experience from previous events, especially for large disruptions. REFLECT MORE TO LEARN FASTER Measuring the effects of exception handling had been incredibly challenging, but Baker’s tool One important practice that the Baker group allowed Southwest to identify patterns, establish brought to network operations was that it celebrat- trends, and recognize anomalies far more quickly. ed exceptions. Until the work- The tool enabled the workgroup to reflect on the group was convened, excep- trade-offs before taking action; it also provided new tion handling remained a sort transparency, across the entire network, feeding re- of “shadow activity” within flection and discussion with hard numbers, both in the organization—every SoD the moment and after an event. There are so many had her own way of dealing different ways to dissect a solution that, even with with network disruptions. Even more frustrating: the tool, there’s rarely a right or wrong answer, but Disruptions and ad hoc solutions often went unit has allowed SoDs to focus their energy on looking acknowledged because they seemed to provide evi- at the trade-offs rather than on manually playing dence that the processes in place weren’t working. out the decisions in spreadsheets. As operations expanded and the frequency of For the workgroup members, being both creators disruptions increased, group members had no and users of their own tool paid extra dividends. choice but to confront these exceptions. However, They constantly sought feedback from their col- Baker went beyond confronting them—it aimed to leagues—indeed, their colleagues sought them out adopt a new mind-set about treating disruptions as to give feedback—and the faster they implemented an important part of the business and changing the features and enhancements, the better their own culture of the organization to one of making these work lives became. Discussing the feedback on the disruptions and the impact of decisions transpar- tool and prioritizing tool enhancements and fixes ent so that members could learn from them. For have actually served as a vehicle for the workgroup instance, with winter storm event Thor, Southwest to reflect more broadly on the trade-offs and how had moved toward being more proactive, but it still to weigh certain variables. The tool revealed some took the airline a painfully long time to execute the things that members didn’t understand previously— decision to shut down an airport and reroute those for instance, that cancellations might be less dam- flights. For Olympia, the Baker group had learned aging than delays or that they should focus more on the cost of delayed action and was able to make “canceling the right flights” rather than just avoiding rerouting and cancellation decisions much faster; cancellations. These types of revelations opened the not only did it affect passengers less negatively— door to revisiting other assumptions they all made it affected all operations less negatively, with less about the network. pain for employees. The Baker group celebrated Where previously SoDs made many decisions such exceptions, seeing them as opportunities and on gut instinct and had little way of evaluating the embracing each chance to get better at handling quality of their decisions, the tool provided a rich situations members couldn’t fully anticipate. data input that changed their ability, as individu- The workgroup also promoted a more proactive als and as a group, to reflect on the trade-offs they approach to managing the network, requiring a new made. One learning that came from this reflection level of pre-reflection to anticipate the effects on was that following gut instinct often led to subopti- multiple parts of the system. This included bring- mal decisions. ing in perspectives from outside the workgroup,

5 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

MAXIMIZE POTENTIAL FOR FRICTION PRIORTIZE PERFORMANCE TRAJECTORY

When it came to recruiting members, the work- The Baker workgroup needed to optimize the group prioritized passion over skill. Not all SoDs network’s performance based on were eager to embrace change, but Baker multiple factors. When it came to members seemed to have a deep choosing which factors to prioritize, passion to improve the way things trade-offs abounded. Members worked—and they sought out oth- prioritized a trajectory of con- ers with the same mind-set. A key tinuous improvement of the key driver of the group’s success was its ability metrics that represented what to catalyze and amplify the passion of each was most important to their business: satisfying of its members. customers. Importantly, the SoDs who formed the work- As a starting point, members acknowledged that group also recruited members from beyond their they no longer really knew, in the larger system, own departments, bringing in software developers how some of their daily trade-offs worked. That who could challenge and guide the work as core was the genesis of the tool, but practically it meant members. They also continued to leverage the con- that they would inevitably make mistakes on the nections they had with all of the operational groups way to understanding the interdependencies and in their traditional SoD roles to bring in needed making the best decisions for the business. It also skills and perspectives as they debated trade-offs acknowledged that they would inevitably subopti- and alternatives and developed the tool. mize certain parts of the system or certain metrics, Typically, tools such as the one the Baker group in service of driving improved overall performance. was developing might be built in isolation by a tech- The difference now was that they would have more nology department, then rolled out to users who data to compare trade-offs—and a tool that actually would love it or hate it; the developers would never let them test out different solutions. see it in action or talk with users about their reac- For example, consider an inbound plane that tions to the tool. What feedback developers get is has just triggered an unexpected maintenance issue. often limited to short, one-way written comments. If Southwest delays the next flight to fix the issue, By bringing together the diverse perspectives of it would result in 260 missed connections for in- SoDs and developers, shoulder to shoulder in a dividual customers and cause the crew to time-out room with live feedback from their SoD peers, the one leg sooner, leaving them at different airports Baker group heightened the friction that could help than they were scheduled to fly out of on their next create a better tool. They could all also see what shift. If the airline proactively cancels the flight— worked and what didn’t in the moment, bolstered and the rest of those on that plane’s itinerary—and by trust and a shared understanding of each other’s rebooked passengers on other flights, it would cre- jobs. For example, one day the Federal Aviation Ad- ate 20-minute delays for 3,000 customers, but ev- ministration ordered a noise-restricted approach eryone would make it to their destinations. Which path for an airport in the Midwest (a request SoDs decision produces the least bad outcome? Should were accustomed to addressing). Instead of follow- SWA cancel a flight with five hours’ notice, or use ing the traditional, multistep procedure, the SoDs those five hours to try to increase the odds of giving in the Baker group wheeled their chairs over to the customers what they expected? One thing the Bak- software engineers and together created the new er group has learned is that the airline now has so approach in a span of a few hours. many flights connecting throughout the system that

6 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

sometimes canceling a handful of flights actually same time, they’ve recognized that part of improv- displaces fewer passengers than running a flight late. ing the airline’s performance is getting everyone to This web of trade-offs was one that dispatch use the tool. While it hasn’t displaced the overall superintendents had navigated for years, but most performance objective, Baker now prioritizes en- of those trade-offs weren’t explicit or couldn’t be hancements to the tool that can make it simpler known with certainty. Previously, the airline had and easier to use—plenty of defaults and a cleaner defaulted to letting all flights run. Canceling a fully interface—so that all of the SoDs are using it more booked flight just wasn’t done because SoDs as- often, not just during complex weather disruptions. sumed that canceling would clearly have the most This has had an impact on the trajectory of adop- negative impact on customers and the system. And tion: Each new enhancement gets someone excited, given the complexity, just propagating a cancella- often someone who wasn’t previously. According to tion through dispatch, customer service, and crew group members, adoption of the tool rose 200 per- schedules was overwhelming. Now, the Baker group cent after one recent release. has seen how making proactive cancellations or re- routings can have a positive impact not just on get- FRAME A POWERFUL QUESTION ting customers to their destinations but on other operating metrics as well. This group was formed when a few SoDs The workgroup, and the tool, made more visible asked themselves a question their colleague the implied trade-offs and the implications of their had asked five years earlier: How can we use actions across the airline. Now SoDs could track technology to see the impact of our decisions how one cancellation’s effects cascaded across the and make better ones? network, affecting passenger connections, crew, and It came from the recognition that what even scheduled maintenance. Previously, dispatch- worked for a regional airline—relying ers would rely on gut instinct to make such calls, but on gut instinct, prior experience, and they couldn’t inform their instincts with data. The manual calculations and updates, op- Baker group changed that. Today, every Southwest erating all possible flights—was insufficient for a dispatcher decision still has its trade-offs, but now major carrier. Southwest had added more planes, all involved know what the trade-offs are. SoDs also routes, crews, and stations, but the way in which have more informed discussions with other depart- dispatchers approached network disruption hadn’t ments, especially in major weather events, where caught up. Meanwhile, they were working harder they can focus on the impact for the most important than ever. performance metrics for the network rather than for An SoD colleague, the late Mike Baker, had asked each department. a similar question—he was just a little ahead of his The workgroup also prioritized trajectory in the time. He was convinced that there had to be a bet- development of the tool itself, making trade-offs in ter way to leverage the dispatchers’ years of experi- the use of resources to focus on what would help ence, to learn from their past decisions, and make the group make an impact faster on the metrics smarter routing decisions in the future. But without of on-time performance and flight cancellations. access to real-time data for decision analytics, the Rather than build a sleek interface that could im- tool he envisioned was never operationalized. press upper management, they built a tool aimed at Fast-forward five years. Now with access to helping SoDs in the field. Baker members continu- abundant system-wide data, the powerful ques- ously prioritize development of changes that SoDs tion for the SoDs was: How could they honor Mike believe will improve their ability to run the network Baker’s legacy to make smarter routing choices and and have an impact on the metrics that matter to make a complicated job a whole lot easier? They keep moving performance up the curve. At the formed a workgroup committed to addressing the

7 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

very question that he had posed and named it in his we could capture all of our knowledge, experience, honor. Baker is now mentioned hundreds of times and day-to-day decisions in a tool and put hard a day throughout the organization, and his passion numbers to them and make us all better. Now we’re for championing smarter routing decisions will live on the brink of completely changing the game for on throughout the next generation of SoDs. As one airline network operations. As we make progress, it group member said, “When I first heard this idea, opens our eyes to what is possible.” I thought it was science fiction—there was no way

8 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

ENDNOTES

1. Per company-provided information. This case is based on a series of interviews, conducted on-site at Dallas Love Field as well as via telephone with leadership and members of the Field Tech group, between April and November 2017.

2. Steve West, senior director, “Network Operations Control,” 2016.

3. Per company-provided analysis.

4. Per company data and analysis.

5. Per company data.

9 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

JOHN HAGEL

John Hagel is co-chairman of Deloitte Center for the Edge; he has nearly 35 years of experience as a management consultant, author, speaker, and entrepreneur and has helped companies improve performance by applying IT to reshape business strategies. In addition to holding significant positions at leading consulting firms and companies throughout his career, Hagel is the author of bestselling business books such as Net Gain, Net Worth, Out of the Box, The Only Sustainable Edge, and The Power of Pull. He is on LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/jhagel and on Twitter @jhagel.

JOHN SEELY BROWN

John Seely Brown (JSB) is independent co-chairman of Deloitte Center for the Edge and a prolific writer, speaker, and educator. In addition to his work with the Center for the Edge, JSB is adviser to the provost and a visiting scholar at the University of Southern California. This position followed a lengthy tenure at Xerox Corp., where he was chief scientist and director of the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center. JSB has pub- lished more than 100 papers in scientific journals and authored or co-authored seven books, includingThe Social Life of Information, The Only Sustainable Edge, The Power of Pull, and A New Culture of Learning.

ANDREW DE MAAR

Andrew De Maar is head of strategy at the Deloitte Center for the Edge where he works with senior leaders to rethink what’s required for success in a more rapidly changing world by helping them to reframe their approaches to strategy, innovation, and business transformation. He has worked broadly across industries on emerging opportunities at the edge of business and technology. His writing and speaking focuses on the opportunities we all have—as individuals and institutions—to achieve more and more of our potential over time. He has an MBA from Stanford University and is on LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/AndrewdeMaar.

MAGGIE WOOLL

Maggie Wooll is head of eminence at Deloitte Center for the Edge; she combines her experience advising large organizations on strategy and operations with her passion for getting the stories behind the data and the data behind the stories to shape the Center’s perspectives. At the Center, she explores the emerging opportunities at the intersection of people, technologies, and institutions. She is particularly interested in the impact new technologies and business practices have on talent development and learning for the future workforce and workplace. She is on LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/margaretwooll.

10 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

RESEARCH TEAM

Michael Ding was a research fellow at Deloitte Center for the Edge; he is passionate about seeking technology and analytics driven approaches to address challenging problems. As a senior consultant within Deloitte’s Cyber Risk Services, he has assisted clients with discovering and managing information secu- rity and privacy risks across a range of industries, including technology and retail. At the Center, Ding has researched extensively on continuous improvement methodologies related to agile, DevOps from leading enterprises and scalable learning from emerging e-sports ecosystems.

Ryan Gatti was a research fellow at Deloitte Center for the Edge, focused on the intersection of strategy and innovation. He is passionate about understanding how the world is changing and, in particular, how disruption will affect fintech players, emerging markets, and broader ecosystem plays. As a consultant within Deloitte Consulting LLP’s Strategy practice, Gatti has helped clients analyze competitive threats, better understand players on the periphery, enter new markets, and stand up corporate innovation units. At the Center, he focused on innovation, scouting organizations that are operating on the edge of what is possible, and establishing broader partnerships across the ecosystem.

Dalia Katan was a research fellow at Deloitte Center for the Edge; she is a strategist and designer passionate about using design thinking to foster creativity and human connection in the workplace and to transform the work for the future. Working within Deloitte’s Strategy & Operations practice, Katan has worked with consumer products and technology clients to solve problems related to brand, growth, and innovation strategy. At the Center, she focused on learnings from technology, emergency response, and hospitality industries that may help teams improve their performance over time.

Abigail Sickinger was a research fellow at Deloitte Center for the Edge, passionate about exploring how the rapid evolution of technology is making it difficult for humans to keep up and their organizations to remain relevant. At the Center, she delved into the group dynamics and decision-making that shape how practices are adopted and replicated within an organization. As a consultant within Deloitte’s Strategy and Operations practice, Sickinger has helped a range of clients, from public transportation to pharma- ceutical company to a youth education nonprofit plan for and take advantage of new opportunities.

11 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We could not have developed this topic without the generous and open participation of the following individuals: Brandon Beard, Mike Perna, John Strickland, Dave Fischer, Barry Lott, Jesse Luck, Matt Hafner, Steve Hozdulick, Ryan Files, Charles Cunningham, Alan Kasher, Sonya Lacore, Jeff Hamlett, Craig Drew, Paul Butler, Merlin Ward, Annalie Killian, Terry Young, Nikelii Bennett, Irineu Romano, Adam Goldstein, Luz Luna, Hani Eid, Patricia Conway, Gray Shealy, Raimund Gschaider, Fernando Iglesia, Adam Goldstein, Harri Kulovaara, Kevin Douglas, Kelly Gonzalez, Xavier Leclercq, Joseph Miorelli, Diane Stratton, Paris Swann, Gaby Landa, Erin Barton, Jaime Lemus, Carla Makela, Zack Cangiano, Gabe Trujillo, Daniel Schneider, Eric Lewis, Kelly Watkins, Neil Shah, Sheela Subrama- nian, Elain Zelby, Emily Stephens, Richard Hasslacher, Michael Lopp, Julieanna Gray, Melody Kho- daverdian, Anastasia Afendikova, Jamie Feeley, Jimmy Lee, Matt Schwartz, Walter Villavicencio, Venkat Venkatakrishnan, Justin Berger, Randy Reeves, J. Taylor Dawson, Naama Gorodischer, Yo- tam Politzer, Stanley McChrystal, Frank Kearney, Maureen LeBoeuf, Rebecca S. Halstead, James “Spider” Marks, Jen Rubio, Steph Korey, Alyssa Pollock, Lynda Hruska, George Samuels, Coran Lill, Skip Skivington, Vivian Tan, Joy Marcus, Jan Ferguson, Michael St. James, Jason Wiseman, Ariel Yoffe, Ryan Villanova, Samantha Klein, Jake Guglin, Antonia Cecio, Kiomi Sakata, Bronson Green, Carson Cland, Dennis Holden, Matthew D’Amato, Lisa Gluskin Stonestreet, Erich Stonestreet, and Sha Huang.

In addition, we are grateful to the colleagues and friends whose enthusiasm and insights helped shape this topic: Maynard Webb, Guarav Tewari, Waguih Ishak, Dick Levy, Brian Rouch, Doug Bade, Doug Gish, Andrew Blau, Cheryl Pinter-Real, Jacquie Obi, Joseph Bakal, Tom Nassim, Lynne Sterrett, John Tripp, David Kuder, David Martin, Matt David, Amy Feirn, John Henry, James O’Kane, Mat- thew Standart, Chad Whitman, Kusandha Hertrich, Tim Gillam, Wendy Meredith, Greg Tevis, Bill Pollard, Debbie Fox, Phil Lubik, Matt Angelo, Amy Lawson-Stopps, Stephanie Hill, Jack Wisnefske, Grant Hartanov, Peter Liu, John Gelline, Peter Robertson, Dave Zaboski, Blythe Aronowitz, Neda Shemluck, Mukesh Singhal, Paul Keck, and Duleesha Kulasooriya.

The team would also like to thank the following individuals whose support is invaluable: Jodi Gray, Car- rie Howell, Matthew Budman, Emily Koteff Moreano, Molly Woodworth, and Joanie Pearson.

12 Southwest Airlines: Baker workgroup

CONTACTS

Blythe Aronowitz Peter Williams Chief of staff, Center for the Edge Chief edge officer, Centre for the Edge Australia Deloitte Services LP Tel: +61 3 9671 7629 +1 408 704 2483 [email protected] [email protected]

Wassili Bertoen Managing director, Center for the Edge Europe Deloitte Netherlands +31 6 21272293 [email protected]

13 Sign up for Deloitte Insights updates at www.deloitte.com/insights.

Follow @DeloitteInsight

Deloitte Insights contributors Editorial: Matthew Budman, Nikita Garia, Abrar Khan Creative: Emily Koteff Moreano, Molly Woodworth Promotion: Amy Bergstrom Artwork: Eduardo Fuentas

About Deloitte Insights Deloitte Insights publishes original articles, reports and periodicals that provide insights for businesses, the public sector and NGOs. Our goal is to draw upon research and experience from throughout our professional services organization, and that of coauthors in academia and business, to advance the conversation on a broad spectrum of topics of interest to executives and government leaders. Deloitte Insights is an imprint of Deloitte Development LLC.

About this publication This publication contains general information only, and none of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, its member firms, or its and their affiliates are, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your finances or your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your finances or your business, you should consult a qualified professional adviser. None of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, its member firms, or its and their respective affiliates shall be responsible for any loss whatsoever sustained by any person who relies on this publication.

About Deloitte Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee (“DTTL”), its network of member firms, and their related entities. DTTL and each of its member firms are legally separate and independent entities. DTTL (also referred to as “Deloitte Global”) does not provide services to clients. In the United States, Deloitte refers to one or more of the US member firms of DTTL, their related entities that operate using the “Deloitte” name in the United States and their respective affiliates. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting. Please see www.deloitte.com/about to learn more about our global network of member firms. Copyright © 2019 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved. Member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited